Development Paradigm Revisited: A Few Anthropological Considerations
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
AbstractThe aim of this paper is to ponder over the term, 'development', as a concept with regard to the Third World countries, especially, in relation to Pakistan. Traditionally and historically, the debate on 'development' has ignored local or indigenous perspectives usually dubbed as 'backward', 'traditional', 'obsolete', and 'out-dated.' The authors are of the view that development as a concept has been misused to subjugate as well as subordinate the third world nations in order to extend colonial agenda. This was done deliberately to make local populations of the third world countries, like Pakistan, to shun their indigenous intellectual heritage. The paper is an attempt to generate a scholastic debate and exchange of professional views upon the development direction as required by countries like Pakistan. In addition, the paper builds an anthropological case to include the socio-cultural factors in order to revisit the development paradigm to suit the unique cultural perspective of the nation.Keywords, the 'development' concept; third world countries; anthropological perspective; socio-cultural factors; development paradigmIntroductionGovernment of Canada in a report quoted Brian Walker to say 'the field of development is a veritable junkyard of abandoned models, each focused on a particular aspect while ignoring the rest' (Winegard, 1987). Between 1950 and 1985, 60 former colonies attained political independence. Many, stressed by poverty, had little experience in self-governance, public service administration, financial, resource and industrial management. The world had no earlier experience of political and economic change on so large, rapid and diverse a scale. Assistance programs were a novelty and largely conducted by trial and error, many donors seeking unrealizable rapid results and simple remedies for highly complex and disparate difficulties (Hulse, 2007).The situation seemed to be changing after the works of The World Commission on Environment and Development in which Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland came up with an innovation of introducing a new term 'sustainable development' which was 'to ensure that it [development] meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs' (WCED, 1987). 'The word 'development' has been narrowed to the perception of what poor nations should do to become richer'. 'The 'environment' is where we live; 'development' is what we do in attempting to improve our lot within our abode'. 'The downward spiral of poverty and environmental degradation incur a waste of opportunities and resources'. 'Economic growth must be based on policies that sustain and expand the environmental resource base' (Ibid).On June 20th 1997, General Assembly of the United Nations (UN) adopted 'Agenda for Development' as a result of four years' extensive deliberations made by the member states and secretariats of the United Nations. The then Secretary General of UN, Mr. Kofi A. Anan remarks on the 'emergence of globalization and interdependence as key features of the new international environment' as follows:On the positive side, increased trade and communications present opportunities for all nations to enjoy. But many long standing problems and their solutions have increasingly taken on international dimensions as well. Environmental degradation, extreme poverty, sudden population shifts, massive human rights violations, illegal drug trafficking and organized crime are all threats to development that can no longer be resolved by national efforts alone, no matter how important those efforts may be. The way in which the world copes with this global interdependence to ensure equitable and sustainable development is one of the great challenges facing the international community (United Nations, 1997: vii-viii).The agenda for development understands the role of peace and security for attainment of development. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».